similar to: bonding mode

Ok, some more question as I'm still planning our SDS (but I'm prone to use LizardFS, gluster is too inflexible) Let's assume a replica 3: 1) currently, is not possbile to add a single server and rebalance like any order SDS (Ceph, Lizard, Moose, DRBD, ....), right ? In replica 3, I have to add 3 new servers 2) The same should be by add disks on spare slots on existing servers.

On Wed, 2018-05-09 at 18:26 +0000, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: > Ok, some more question as I'm still planning our SDS (but I'm prone > to use > LizardFS, gluster is too inflexible) > > Let's assume a replica 3: > > 1) currently, is not possbile to add a single server and rebalance > like any > order SDS (Ceph, Lizard, Moose, DRBD, ....), right ? In replica

I have a Dell server with four bonded, gigabit interfaces. Bonding mode is 802.3ad, xmit_hash_policy=layer3+4. When testing this setup with iperf, I never get more than a total of about 3Gbps throughput. Is there anything to tweak to get better throughput? Or am I running into other limits (e.g. was reading about tcp retransmit limits for mode 0). The iperf test was run with iperf -s on the

(first post) Dear all, I have been wrestling with this issue for the past few days ; googling around doesn't seem to yield anything useful, hence this cry for help. Setup : - I am running several RHEL5.4 KVM virtio guest instances on a Dell PE R805 RHEL5.4 host. Host and guests are fully updated ; I am using iperf to test available bandwidth from 3 different locations (clients) in the

Anyone made some performance comparison between XFS and ZFS with ZIL on SSD, in gluster environment ? I've tried to compare both on another SDS (LizardFS) and I haven't seen any tangible performance improvement. Is gluster different ?

On Tue, Oct 10, 2017, at 11:19 AM, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: > Anyone made some performance comparison between XFS and ZFS with ZIL > on SSD, in gluster environment ? > > I've tried to compare both on another SDS (LizardFS) and I haven't > seen any tangible performance improvement. > > Is gluster different ? Probably not. If there is, it would probably favor

I've had good results with using SSD as LVM cache for gluster bricks ( http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man7/lvmcache.7.html). I still use XFS on bricks. On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 12:27 PM, Jeff Darcy <jeff at pl.atyp.us> wrote: > On Tue, Oct 10, 2017, at 11:19 AM, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: > > Anyone made some performance comparison between XFS and ZFS with ZIL > > on

Hi, So is the KVM or Vmware as the host(s)? I basically have the same setup ie 3 x 1TB "raid1" nodes and VMs, but 1gb networking. I do notice with vmware using NFS disk was pretty slow (40% of a single disk) but this was over 1gb networking which was clearly saturating. Hence I am moving to KVM to use glusterfs hoping for better performance and bonding, it will be interesting to see

Hi, samba 3.0.24, debian etch I'm seeing a strange effect with samba and traffic over a bond0 interface in round robin mode. 2 server each with 2 GbE interfaces as bond0 device ind rr mode. netio benchmark: NETIO - Network Throughput Benchmark, Version 1.26 (C) 1997-2005 Kai Uwe Rommel TCP connection established. Packet size 1k bytes: 182840 KByte/s Tx, 197599 KByte/s Rx. Packet size

Hello I'm using CentOS Linux release 7.3.1611 (Core) with kernel 3.10.0-514.16.1.el7.x86_64 Using iperf for bond benchmarking, and opening several sockets, I noticed a strange behavior. My Centos using iperf as a client to connect to an iperf server (running either CentOS or Debian) requesting N parallel TCP connections. I notice that the local ephemeral ports used are not consecutive and

It worries me how many threads talk about low performance. I'm about to build out a replica 3 setup and run Ovirt with a bunch of Windows VMs. Are the issues Tony is experiencing "normal" for Gluster? Does anyone here have a system with windows VMs and have good performance? *Vincent Royer* *778-825-1057* <http://www.epicenergy.ca/> *SUSTAINABLE MOBILE ENERGY SOLUTIONS*

Hello All, I am currently using bonding with 2 NICs (using mode 0). Its been working well, but I am trying to understand how it works (I am a total newbie). mode=0 (balance-rr) Round-robin policy: Transmit packets in sequential order from the first available slave through the last. This mode provides load balancing and fault tolerance. So I have 2 NICs (1 NIC attached to switch A, 2nd NIC

Hi Abou, Try this: library(plotrix) curve(rescale(dnorm(x ,mean=mean(Lizard.tail.lengths),sd=sd(Lizard.tail.lengths)), c(0,6)),add=TRUE, col=2, lwd = 2) Jim On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 9:35 AM, AbouEl-Makarim Aboueissa <abouelmakarim1962 at gmail.com> wrote: > Dear All: > > One more thing. > > I want to add the normal curve to the histogram. Is there away to stretch > the

On 01/05/2018 02:27, Thing wrote: > Hi, > > So is the KVM or Vmware as the host(s)?? I basically have the same setup > ie 3 x 1TB "raid1" nodes and VMs, but 1gb networking.? I do notice with > vmware using NFS disk was pretty slow (40% of a single disk) but this > was over 1gb networking which was clearly saturating.? Hence I am moving > to KVM to use glusterfs

Hi, I'm trying to setup a bridge with a bonded device (2 links, balance-rr). The problem is that after attaching the bonded device to the bridge the network throughput drops down from 110MB to 100KB. This seems to be due to the MAC address of internal devices of the bridge being seen on the external ports, where the bonded device exists (see also the URLs below). An arp packet from some

Hi *, I'm running into a problem configuring bonding on an HP DL 360 G4p, running 4.3 + tg3 driver version 3.43f. I'm connecting eth0 and eth1 to a Cisco 2948 (CatOS 8.1(3)) and receiving flapping notices. The ethernet address is that of the primary interface. I have tried several different modes, including balance-rr (0), active-backup (1), and balance-alb (6). All have the

Hi, I am trying to configure linux bonding using balance-rr configuration. I could not find a way to configure dhcpd.conf for this purpose and failed miserably when I tried the following (dhcpd just failed): host servername { hardware ethernet [mac address interface #1] ; hardware ethernet [mac address interface #2] ; fixed-address 10.0.10.6; } In my understanding balance-rr would be

Dear All: One more thing. I want to add the normal curve to the histogram. Is there away to stretch the peak of the curve to the top of the histogram or at least near to the top of the histogram. Please see the code below. Lizard.tail.lengths <- c(6.2, 6.6, 7.1, 7.4, 7.6, 7.9, 8, 8.3, 8.4, 8.5, 8.6,8.8, 8.8, 9.1, 9.2, 9.4, 9.4, 9.7, 9.9, 10.2, 10.4, 10.8,11.3, 11.9) x<-seq(5,12, 0.001)

I am working on setting up an NFS server, which will mainly serve files to web servers, and I want to setup two bonds. I have a question regarding *which* bonding mode to use. None of the documentation I have read suggests any mode is "better" than other with the exception of specific use cases (e.g. switch does not support 802.3ad, active-backup). Since my switch *does* support

Hi all, I've got two gigabit ethernet interfaces bonded in CentOS 5.6. I've set "miimode=1000" and I've tried "mode=" 0, 4 and 6. I've not been able to get better than 112MB/sec, which is the same as the non-bonded interfaces. My config files are: === cat /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-{eth1,eth2,bond0} # SN1 HWADDR=00:30:48:fd:26:71